The real inconvenient truth

[Rodster]

Is climate change happening? Yes. But does it deserve the funding and hysteria that it's receiving? No.

Weather cycles last decades or centuries. I don't think the intense political spotlight that has been focused on global warming for the last eight years allows a long enough sample time to truly indicate whether this climate change is man-made or cyclical.

Remember, the next ice age was coming just 33 years ago.

Take care,
PK

Agreed which is why I prefer to let the scientist hash it out on both sides before I make an informed decision. The problem is some of the anti GW comments sound like a rip from the pages of the Michael Savage, Rush Limbaugh, Shawn Hannity playbook.

It's one thing to truly believe there is no such thing as GW. I respect that, but it's a totally different matter if some radio talk show host who gets paid for his opinions, not facts conditioned you to believe it doesn't exist. Because if that's the case you are (not singling anyone out) no better than the Al Gore lemmings on the other side who believe what he says.

Again that's why it's better for science to deal with it and come to a final conclusion which we are not there yet.

[Teal]

I'm not a radio talk show host who gets paid for his opinions, though. I'm a normal, everyday man who simply sees the dog and pony show for what it is. It is, as I've said before, "a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."-Macbeth.

[Rodster]

Like I said Teal if you believe GW is a farse, I respect that. If on the other hand you formed your opinion based on what some radio personality says then shame on you.

As i've said many times before my mind is not made up yet. I will wait for the experts on both sides to hash it out and come to an undeniable conclusion. At that point I will declare it to be either the truth or a hoax.

[XXXIV]

Its all a joke to me. Not that weather changes... but that people actually listen to that jack ass.

5,000- 10,000 years ago the Sahara desert was all wetlands.

Again ...climates change.

To think you are the one changing it is just plain silly.

EDIT: To be fair to both sides...It could also be that...

When the Sahara's climate changed from wetlands to desert it was beacuse the indiginous peoples began air travel, driving SUV's, using Aerosol cans and lets not forget ...eating meat.

[wco81]

I will wait for the experts on both sides to hash it out and come to an undeniable conclusion. At that point I will declare it to be either the truth or a hoax.

There are no both sides when it comes to the scientific community.

There is unanimity other than a few shills, most of whom aren't even climate scientists, paid for by certain think tanks and the oil industry.

You will not find a group of scientists who deny climate change which is as large as the one represented by the IPCC reports, the USGS, the NOAA, etc.

Again, the attempt to portray climate change as being less than a scientific consensus is straight out of the Frank Luntz playbook.

And there's no hysteria about climate change from scientists. The IPCC report is sober in tone and even in it, they are hedging a bit (they rarely attribute 100% confidence).

As for theories about the ice age 33 years ago, apparently there's been no progress in the tools available to scientists, such as huge improvements in data processing, data mining, greater use of satellite data, greater data collection methodology, etc.

[GameSeven]

There are no both sides when it comes to the scientific community.

There is unanimity other than a few shills, most of whom aren't even climate scientists, paid for by certain think tanks and the oil industry.

Way to trivialize valid arguments from your opposition. It could be easily argued that so many GW scientists derive their livelihood from GW study that their opinions are baseless. That said, there are clearly multiple sides of the debate, to deny that is the epitome of arrogance.

As for theories about the ice age 33 years ago, apparently there's been no progress in the tools available to scientists, such as huge improvements in data processing, data mining, greater use of satellite data, greater data collection methodology, etc.

So I guess we know everything now? We can trust these guys are right this time?

[Leebo33]

As for theories about the ice age 33 years ago, apparently there's been no progress in the tools available to scientists, such as huge improvements in data processing, data mining, greater use of satellite data, greater data collection methodology, etc.

I'd be happy if all this advanced technology could get me a ONE day forecast that was accurate let alone decades or centuries. I was all pumped to ride my bike yesterday because it was supposed to be 54 and sunny, but yet it barely got above 40 degrees with a thick fog. I felt like a kid that got a lump of coal in my stocking.

[wco81]

There are no both sides when it comes to the scientific community.

There is unanimity other than a few shills, most of whom aren't even climate scientists, paid for by certain think tanks and the oil industry.

Way to trivialize valid arguments from your opposition. It could be easily argued that so many GW scientists derive their livelihood from GW study that their opinions are baseless. That said, there are clearly multiple sides of the debate, to deny that is the epitome of arrogance.

So name them. We'll see who funds whose livelihood. NOAA and USGS are funded by taxpayers, regardless of what findings they reach.

As for theories about the ice age 33 years ago, apparently there's been no progress in the tools available to scientists, such as huge improvements in data processing, data mining, greater use of satellite data, greater data collection methodology, etc.

So I guess we know everything now? We can trust these guys are right this time?

No, the data and methodology 30 years from now will be more refined than they are now.

But in the early '70s, they may have been using mainframes with tubes.

[Feanor]

Wow, you can search google images, so you must be smarter and know better than the thousands of scientists who think that humans are contributing to global warming.

Um, didn't you do the exact same thing?

I searched google images, but not as part of a hilarious campaign to convince us that the overwhelming majority of climate change scientists are dumb and Teal is smart. I fixed your selective quote since you left out the relevant part.

[wco81]

As for theories about the ice age 33 years ago, apparently there's been no progress in the tools available to scientists, such as huge improvements in data processing, data mining, greater use of satellite data, greater data collection methodology, etc.

I'd be happy if all this advanced technology could get me a ONE day forecast that was accurate let alone decades or centuries. I was all pumped to ride my bike yesterday because it was supposed to be 54 and sunny, but yet it barely got above 40 degrees with a thick fog. I felt like a kid that got a lump of coal in my stocking.

You might want to look into the difference between climate science and meteorology.

It's kind of like the difference between macroeconomic forecasts and a company looking at futures prices of commodities which only affect its own business instead of the whole economy.

[XXXIV]

As for theories about the ice age 33 years ago, apparently there's been no progress in the tools available to scientists, such as huge improvements in data processing, data mining, greater use of satellite data, greater data collection methodology, etc.

I'd be happy if all this advanced technology could get me a ONE day forecast that was accurate let alone decades or centuries. I was all pumped to ride my bike yesterday because it was supposed to be 54 and sunny, but yet it barely got above 40 degrees with a thick fog. I felt like a kid that got a lump of coal in my stocking.

You might want to look into the difference between climate science and meteorology.

It's kind of like the difference between macroeconomic forecasts and a company looking at futures prices of commodities which only affect its own business instead of the whole economy.

Kinda like the difference between Albert Einstein and and lets say Al Gore.

[GameSeven]

As for theories about the ice age 33 years ago, apparently there's been no progress in the tools available to scientists, such as huge improvements in data processing, data mining, greater use of satellite data, greater data collection methodology, etc.

I'd be happy if all this advanced technology could get me a ONE day forecast that was accurate let alone decades or centuries. I was all pumped to ride my bike yesterday because it was supposed to be 54 and sunny, but yet it barely got above 40 degrees with a thick fog. I felt like a kid that got a lump of coal in my stocking.

You might want to look into the difference between climate science and meteorology.

It's kind of like the difference between macroeconomic forecasts and a company looking at futures prices of commodities which only affect its own business instead of the whole economy.

Yes, as climate science has proven accurate to, say, 30 years.

[matthewk]

There are no both sides when it comes to the scientific community.

There is unanimity other than a few shills, most of whom aren't even climate scientists, paid for by certain think tanks and the oil industry.

AHA! It's the evil oil comapanies fault! Of course!

Since you can no longer hammer on them for artificially rasing the price of gas and raking in record profits, might as well make them responsible for something else.

[bdoughty]

Wow, you can search google images, so you must be smarter and know better than the thousands of scientists who think that humans are contributing to global warming.

Um, didn't you do the exact same thing?

I searched google images, but not as part of a hilarious campaign to convince us that the overwhelming majority of climate change scientists are dumb and Teal is smart. I fixed your selective quote since you left out the relevant part.

You don't need to be a scientist to figure this one out Feanor.

[matthewk]

As for theories about the ice age 33 years ago, apparently there's been no progress in the tools available to scientists, such as huge improvements in data processing, data mining, greater use of satellite data, greater data collection methodology, etc.

So I guess we know everything now? We can trust these guys are right this time?

I bet one of WCOs relatives said this same thing 33 years ago, except then it was more like: "As for theories about the world being flat,
apparently there's been no progress in the tools available to scientists...blah, blah..."

[wco81]

Yes, as climate science has proven accurate to, say, 30 years.

And you want to gamble that they're wrong?

It's one thing if a forecast is wrong and you can't go on a picnic.

But if the effects of climate change turn out to be true, I know, people just learn to swim right?

And give up their condos with ocean views?

In the mean time, we can't risk profits to the oil companies with this hysteria.

[wco81]

I bet one of WCOs relatives said this same thing 33 years ago, except then it was more like: "As for theories about the world being flat,
apparently there's been no progress in the tools available to scientists...blah, blah..."

Oh I belong to the flat earth society and you're what, a member of the illuminati?

[Leebo33]

You might want to look into the difference between climate science and meteorology.

I can think of a lot more useful things to do with my time...like watching a video of cars sliding down a hill

[wco81]

You might want to look into the difference between climate science and meteorology.

I can think of a lot more useful things to do with my time...like watching a video of cars sliding down a hill

But you found time to mix up the two.

And get pumped about the sunny day bike ride.

[Leebo33]

[Feanor]

You don't need to be a scientist to figure this one out Feanor.

This isn't the Post a picture of yourself thread, but thanks for sharing.

[matthewk]

[quote="wco81"]But if the effects of climate change turn out to be true, I know, people just learn to swim right?[\quote]

Yep.

[quote="wco81"]
And give up their condos with ocean views? [\quote]

Yep.

[fsquid]

I think Global Warming crowd is simply all the USA for Africa guys. Wonder what they'll be up in arms about in 20 more years.

[XXXIV]

I think Global Warming crowd is simply all the USA for Africa guys. Wonder what they'll be up in arms about in 20 more years.

I dont know...How can one predict what sheep will do in 20 years?

[fsquid]

I think Global Warming crowd is simply all the USA for Africa guys. Wonder what they'll be up in arms about in 20 more years.

I dont know...How can one predict what sheep will do in 20 years?

good point. Let me know when we are all supposed to join hands again.